Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Thanks everyone, I'm closing the vote. On 2024/02/14 16:51:02 Valentyn Tymofieiev via dev wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:52 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:48 AM Robert Burke wrote: > > > >> +1 (binding) > >> > >> On Wed,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:52 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:48 AM Robert Burke wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024, 7:35 AM Yi Hu via dev wrote: >> >>> +1 (non-binding) >>> >>> checked artifact packages not leaking

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:48 AM Robert Burke wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024, 7:35 AM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> checked artifact packages not leaking namespace (or under >> org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p60p1) and the tests in >>

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 14, 2024, 7:35 AM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > checked artifact packages not leaking namespace (or under > org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p60p1) and the tests in > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/30212 > > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 4:29 AM Sam

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (non-binding) checked artifact packages not leaking namespace (or under org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p60p1) and the tests in https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/30212 On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 4:29 AM Sam Whittle wrote: > Hi, > Sorry I missed that close step. Done! > Sam > > On Mon, Feb

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Hi, Sorry I missed that close step. Done! Sam On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 8:32 PM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to open " > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1369/; > but get "[id=orgapachebeam-1369] exists but is not exposed." It seems the > staging

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Hi, I am trying to open " https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1369/; but get "[id=orgapachebeam-1369] exists but is not exposed." It seems the staging repository needs to be closed to have it available to public: [1] [1]

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (binding) Thanks, Cham On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 5:25 AM Sam Whittle wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor, > following the process [5]: > > * beam-vendor-grpc-1-60-1:0.2 > > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (binding). Thanks, Cham On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:40 AM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > > Notably, the vendored artifact has no impact on the repo until the > version used is also bumped. > > That is correct. The PR that actually bump the version then the change > takes effect will be like

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

> Notably, the vendored artifact has no impact on the repo until the version used is also bumped. That is correct. The PR that actually bump the version then the change takes effect will be like https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/29976 On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 10:11 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Notably, the vendored artifact has no impact on the repo until the version used is also bumped, right? So the release is very low stakes. Kenn On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 4:55 PM Robert Bradshaw via dev wrote: > Thanks. > > +1 > > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:24 PM Yi Hu wrote: > >> The process I

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Thanks. +1 On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:24 PM Yi Hu wrote: > The process I have been following is [1]. I have also suggested edits to > the voting email template to include the self-link. However, does anyone > can edit this doc so the change can be made? Otherwise we might better to > migrate

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

The process I have been following is [1]. I have also suggested edits to the voting email template to include the self-link. However, does anyone can edit this doc so the change can be made? Otherwise we might better to migrate this doc to

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Could you explain the process you used to produce these artifacts? On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:23 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 6:03 PM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >> >> *

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 6:03 PM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > Hi everyone, > > > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_60_1 > > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as > follows: > > [ ] +1, Approve the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Update: the beam-vendor-grpc-1_54_0 artifact is now released and the development branch has been switched to use it [1]. [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/26371 Thanks everyone! On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 2:57 PM Yi Hu wrote: > I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 3 approving votes, 3 of which are binding: * Kenneth Knowles * Chamikara Jayalath * Robert Bradshaw There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone! On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 6:11 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:20 AM Chamikara Jayalath via dev < dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > Cham > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:04 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:30 PM Yi Hu via dev >> wrote: >> >>> Please review the release of the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 Thanks, Cham On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:04 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:30 PM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > >> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >> >> * beam-vendor-grpc-1_54_0 >> >> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Please review and

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:30 PM Yi Hu via dev wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_54_0 > > > > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as > follows: > > [ ] +1, Approve the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 Thanks! -P. On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 9:24 AM Chamikara Jayalath via dev < dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > Cham > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 1:49 PM Luke Cwik via dev > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> I verified the signatures of the artifacts, that the jar doesn't contain >> classes outside

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 Thanks, Cham On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 1:49 PM Luke Cwik via dev wrote: > +1 > > I verified the signatures of the artifacts, that the jar doesn't contain > classes outside of the org/apache/beam/vendor/grpc/v1p48p1 package and I > tested the artifact against our precommits using >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 I verified the signatures of the artifacts, that the jar doesn't contain classes outside of the org/apache/beam/vendor/grpc/v1p48p1 package and I tested the artifact against our precommits using https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/22595 On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 1:42 PM Luke Cwik wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 7 approving votes, 4 of which are binding: * Pablo Estrada * Etienne Chauchot * Jean-Baptiste Onofre * Ismaël Mejía There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone! On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:17 PM Ismaël Mejía

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (binding)

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (binding) Regards JB > Le 20 mai 2021 à 10:56, Etienne Chauchot a écrit : > > +1 (binding) on releasing vendored bytebuddy for testing in > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14824 > > Etienne > > On 19/05/2021 23:43, Kai Jiang wrote: >> +1

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (binding) on releasing vendored bytebuddy for testing in https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14824 Etienne On 19/05/2021 23:43, Kai Jiang wrote: +1 (non-binding) On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:23 PM Jan Lukavský > wrote: +1 (non-binding) verified correct

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:23 PM Jan Lukavský wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > verified correct shading. > > Jan > On 5/19/21 8:53 PM, Ismaël Mejía wrote: > > This release is only to publish the vendored dependency artifacts. We need > those to integrate it and be able to verify

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (non-binding) verified correct shading.  Jan On 5/19/21 8:53 PM, Ismaël Mejía wrote: This release is only to publish the vendored dependency artifacts. We need those to integrate it and be able to verify if it causes problems or not. The PR for this is already opened but it needs the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 All classes in the JAR are shaded correctly under org/apache/beam/vendor On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:54 PM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > This release is only to publish the vendored dependency artifacts. We need > those to integrate it and be able to verify if it causes problems or not. > The PR for

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

This release is only to publish the vendored dependency artifacts. We need those to integrate it and be able to verify if it causes problems or not. The PR for this is already opened but it needs the artifacts of this vote to be ran. https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14824 For ref there is a

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

+1 (binding) I've verified the hash sums. Best -P. On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:45 AM Tyson Hamilton wrote: > I'd like to help, but I don't know how to determine whether this upgrade > is going to cause problems or not. Are there tests I should look at, or > some validation I should perform? > >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

I'd like to help, but I don't know how to determine whether this upgrade is going to cause problems or not. Are there tests I should look at, or some validation I should perform? On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 11:29 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > Kind reminder, the vote is ongoing > > On Mon, May 17, 2021

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.11.0

Kind reminder, the vote is ongoing On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 5:32 PM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_11_0 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.36.0 v0.1 RC1

+1 On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:07 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > +1! > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:22 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:21 PM Robert Bradshaw >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>> Please review the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.36.0 v0.1 RC1

+1! On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:22 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:21 PM Robert Bradshaw > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: >> >>> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >>> *

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.36.0 v0.1 RC1

+1 On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:21 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > >> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >> * beam-vendor-grpc-1_36_0 >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Please review and vote on the release

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.36.0 v0.1 RC1

+1 On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:00 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_36_0 > > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as > follows: > [ ] +1, Approve the release

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288 RC #3

+1 (binding) Verified signatures Verified that there are no conscrypt classes or binaries in jar Verified pom.xml has runtime dependency on conscrypt On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 9:14 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Regards > JB > > Le 5 mars 2020 à 19:55, Luke Cwik a écrit : > >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288 RC #3

+1 (binding) Regards JB > Le 5 mars 2020 à 19:55, Luke Cwik a écrit : > > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.3, as > follows: > [ ] +1,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288 RC #3

+1 (binding) Verified that conscrypt jars and .so files don't appear in the jar. On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:55 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288 RC #2

Cancelling this release, I made a mistake for the commit id which I built from which I should have caught before sending this out. On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:45 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0 > > Hi

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288

Looks like the vote is cancelled. On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:03 PM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > -1 > > It seems we still are adding the conscrypt native libraries as part in > META-INF > > $ jar tvf beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0-0.3.jar | grep conscrypt > 2218176 Mon Sep 17 10:36:24 CEST 2018 >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288

-1 It seems we still are adding the conscrypt native libraries as part in META-INF $ jar tvf beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0-0.3.jar | grep conscrypt 2218176 Mon Sep 17 10:36:24 CEST 2018 META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-linux-x86_64.so 1720832 Mon Sep 17 10:36:24 CEST 2018

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288

+1 (binding) verified hashes On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:20 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > +1 (binding) > Verified signatures > Verified that there are no conscrypt classes in jar > Verified pom.xml has runtime dependency on conscrypt > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 10:35 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > >>

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288

+1 (binding) Verified signatures Verified that there are no conscrypt classes in jar Verified pom.xml has runtime dependency on conscrypt On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 10:35 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Regards > JB > > Le mar. 3 mars 2020 ? 19:31, Luke Cwik a ?crit : > >> Please

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.3 for BEAM-9288

+1 (binding)RegardsJBLe mar. 3 mars 2020 ? 19:31, Luke Cwik a ?crit :Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: * beam-vendor-grpc-1_26_0Hi everyone,Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.3, as follows:[ ] +1, Approve the release[ ] -1, Do

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 6 approving votes, 5 of which are binding: * Luke Cwik * Pablo Estrada * Robert Bradshaw * Ismaël Mejía * Kenneth Knowles There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone! On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 6:39 PM Kenneth

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (binding) On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 8:19 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:28 PM Robert Bradshaw > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:11 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: >> > >> > +1 (binding) >> > Verified hashes. >> > Thank you Ismael! >> >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:28 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:11 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > > > > +1 (binding) > > Verified hashes. > > Thank you Ismael! > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:30 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > >> > >> +1 (binding) > >> >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:11 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > > +1 (binding) > Verified hashes. > Thank you Ismael! > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:30 AM Luke Cwik wrote: >> >> +1 (binding) >> >> Verified signatures and contents of jar to not contain module-info.class >> >> On Wed, Feb 26,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (binding) Verified hashes. Thank you Ismael! On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:30 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Verified signatures and contents of jar to not contain module-info.class > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:45 AM Kai Jiang wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (binding) Verified signatures and contents of jar to not contain module-info.class On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:45 AM Kai Jiang wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 01:23 Ismaël Mejía wrote: > >> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >> *

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8 RC2

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 01:23 Ismaël Mejía wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_10_8 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 0.1, as > follows: > [ ] +1, Approve

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8

Thanks Luke there is indeed an extra module-info.class in the vendored jar. This vote is cancelled. A new vote will be opened once the fix is merged. PTAL https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10970 On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 6:39 PM Luke Cwik wrote: > -1 > > The jar contains

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8

-1 The jar contains META-INF/versions/9/module-info.class copied over from bytebuddy containing: module net.bytebuddy { requires static java.instrument; requires static jdk.unsupported; requires static net.bytebuddy.agent; exports net.bytebuddy; exports net.bytebuddy.agent.builder;

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8

+1Regards JBLe mar. 25 f?vr. 2020 ? 13:43, Isma?l Mej?a a ?crit :Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: * beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_10_8Hi everyone,Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as follows:[ ] +1, Approve the release[ ] -1, Do

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release Byte Buddy 1.10.8

+1 On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:44 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_10_8 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.1, as > follows: > [ ] +1, Approve the release

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 (binding) Verified signatures, produced jar from code and checked that artifact does not contain both Main.class and module-info.classes Thanks for taking care of this Tomo and Luke. On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:27 AM jincheng sun wrote: > +1(non-binding) > > Best, > Jincheng > > > Kai

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1(non-binding) Best, Jincheng Kai Jiang 于2020年2月22日周六 下午2:58写道： > +1 (non-binding) > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 5:03 PM Robin Qiu wrote: > >> +1 (verified) >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:55 PM Robert Bradshaw >> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ahmet

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 (non-binding) On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 5:03 PM Robin Qiu wrote: > +1 (verified) > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:55 PM Robert Bradshaw > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:39 PM Luke Cwik wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 (verified) On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:55 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:39 PM Luke Cwik wrote: > >> > >> +1 (binding) > >> I diffed the binary contents of the 0.1 jar and 0.2 jar

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 (binding) On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > > +1 > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:39 PM Luke Cwik wrote: >> >> +1 (binding) >> I diffed the binary contents of the 0.1 jar and 0.2 jar with no changes to >> the contents of the files and can confirm that module-info.class the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:39 PM Luke Cwik wrote: > +1 (binding) > I diffed the binary contents of the 0.1 jar and 0.2 jar with no changes to > the contents of the files and can confirm that module-info.class the > offending Main.class and Main$1.class have been removed as well. > > On Fri,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release gRPC 1.26.0 v0.2 for BEAM-9252

+1 (binding) I diffed the binary contents of the 0.1 jar and 0.2 jar with no changes to the contents of the files and can confirm that module-info.class the offending Main.class and Main$1.class have been removed as well. On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:38 PM Luke Cwik wrote: > Please review the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 8:48 PM jincheng sun wrote: > +1，checked list as follows： > - verified the hash and signature > - verified that there is no linkage errors > - verified that the content of the pom is expected: the shaded > dependencies are not exposed, the scope of the

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1，checked list as follows： - verified the hash and signature - verified that there is no linkage errors - verified that the content of the pom is expected: the shaded dependencies are not exposed, the scope of the logging dependencies are runtime, etc. Best， Jincheng Kenneth Knowles

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:03 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 2:04 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > >> +1 >> >> verified sha1 and md5 hashes. >> >> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:28 AM Luke Cwik wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> I validated that no classes appeared outside of the >>>

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 2:04 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > +1 > > verified sha1 and md5 hashes. > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:28 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > >> +1 >> >> I validated that no classes appeared outside of the >> org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p26p0 namespace and I also validated that the >>

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 verified sha1 and md5 hashes. On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:28 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > +1 > > I validated that no classes appeared outside of the > org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p26p0 namespace and I also validated that the > linkage checker listed no potential linkage errors. > > On Thu, Jan 9,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 I validated that no classes appeared outside of the org.apache.beam.vendor.grpc.v1p26p0 namespace and I also validated that the linkage checker listed no potential linkage errors. On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:25 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

LGTM On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:24 PM Rui Wang wrote: > Thanks Pablo for jumping in for help. > > Now the sources are moved to [1]. Please let me know if it is ok. > > [1]: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/vendor/calcite/1_20_0/ > > -Rui > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:15 PM Pablo

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Thanks Pablo for jumping in for help. Now the sources are moved to [1]. Please let me know if it is ok. [1]: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/vendor/calcite/1_20_0/ -Rui On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:15 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > I can help. > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:09 PM Rui

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

I can help. On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:09 PM Rui Wang wrote: > There is a step of releasing requires PMC permission: > > """ > > Copy the source release from the dev repository to the release repository > at dist.apache.org using Subversion. > Move last release artifacts from dist.apache.org to

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

There is a step of releasing requires PMC permission: """ Copy the source release from the dev repository to the release repository at dist.apache.org using Subversion. Move last release artifacts from dist.apache.org to archive.apache.org using Subversion. """ Is there a PMC member could help

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 5 approving votes, 3 of which are binding: * Lukasz Cwik * Kenneth Knowles * Ahmet Altay There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone! On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 1:29 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Sep

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 1:22 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:00 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:52 AM Andrew Pilloud >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> Inspected the jar it looked reasonable. >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:00 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:52 AM Andrew Pilloud > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Inspected the jar it looked reasonable. >> >> Andrew >> >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 9:06 AM Rui Wang wrote: >> >>> Friendly ping. >>> >>> >>> -Rui >>> >>> On Thu,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:52 AM Andrew Pilloud wrote: > +1 > > Inspected the jar it looked reasonable. > > Andrew > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 9:06 AM Rui Wang wrote: > >> Friendly ping. >> >> >> -Rui >> >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:50 AM Rui Wang wrote: >> >>> Thanks Kai and Andrew. Now

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 Inspected the jar it looked reasonable. Andrew On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 9:06 AM Rui Wang wrote: > Friendly ping. > > > -Rui > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:50 AM Rui Wang wrote: > >> Thanks Kai and Andrew. Now prgapachebeam-1083 is publicly exposed. >> >> I also found a useful link[1] to

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Friendly ping. -Rui On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:50 AM Rui Wang wrote: > Thanks Kai and Andrew. Now prgapachebeam-1083 is publicly exposed. > > I also found a useful link[1] to explain staging repos in Apache Nexus > > > [1]: >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

You need to close the release for it to be published to the staging server. I can help if you still have questions. Andrew On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 8:48 PM Rui Wang wrote: > I can see prgapachebeam-1083 is in open status in staging repository. I am > not sure why it is not public exposed. I

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

I can see prgapachebeam-1083 is in open status in staging repository. I am not sure why it is not public exposed. I probably need some guidance on it. -Rui On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:50 PM Kai Jiang wrote: > Hi Rui, > > For accessing artifacts [1] in Maven Central Repository, is this intent to

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

Hi Rui, For accessing artifacts [1] in Maven Central Repository, is this intent to be not public exposed? Best, Kai [1] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1083/ On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:57 AM Kai Jiang wrote: > +1 (non-binding)Thanks Rui! > > On Tue, Aug

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (non-binding)Thanks Rui! On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:46 PM Rui Wang wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > > * beam-vendor-calcite-1_20_0 > > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > +1 > verified hashes and signatures > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:40 AM Kai Jiang wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:27 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: >> >>> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 verified hashes and signatures On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:40 AM Kai Jiang wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:27 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > >> Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: >> * beam-vendor-grpc_1_21_0 >> * beam-vendor-guava-26_0-jre

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:27 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor: > * beam-vendor-grpc_1_21_0 > * beam-vendor-guava-26_0-jre > * beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_9_3 > > Hi everyone, > Please review and vote on the release

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

No, the classes weren't expected inside of Guava. Cancelling this release candidate. I don't believe the protos/certs/keys matter and were part of our prior 1.13.1 release as well[1]. I found out that we stopped validating the contents of the vendored jar as part of the release process and

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

pull/8357 proposes to vendor bytebuddy artifact. Is it possible to release "beam-vendor-bytebuddy-1_9_3" in next release candidate? Best, Kai On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:31 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > grpc: jar contains certs, keys, protos at the top

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

grpc: jar contains certs, keys, protos at the top level; intended? guava: jar contains classes not in vendored prefix, with prefixes such as com/google/j2objc, org/codehaus/mojo, com/google/errorprone, org/checkerframework, javax/annotation On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:34 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored Dependencies Release

+1 On 2019/07/09 22:33:48, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > Please review the release of the following artifacts that we vendor:> > * beam-vendor-grpc_1_21_0> > * beam-vendor-guava-26_0-jre> > > Hi everyone,> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the> >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

+1 On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 10:53 PM Pablo Estrada wrote: > > Thanks Luke for writing a thorough guide for this. > +1 > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 1:27 PM Maximilian Michels wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> On 09.07.19 22:16, Udi Meiri wrote: >> > +1 LGTM >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:54 PM Lukasz Cwik >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

Thanks Luke for writing a thorough guide for this. +1 On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 1:27 PM Maximilian Michels wrote: > +1 > > On 09.07.19 22:16, Udi Meiri wrote: > > +1 LGTM > > > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:54 PM Lukasz Cwik > > wrote: > > > > Thanks for taking a look. I

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

+1 On 09.07.19 22:16, Udi Meiri wrote: > +1 LGTM > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:54 PM Lukasz Cwik > wrote: > >     Thanks for taking a look. I followed up on your questions. > >     On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:58 PM Udi Meiri     > wrote: > >    

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

Thanks for taking a look. I followed up on your questions. On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:58 PM Udi Meiri wrote: > I left some comments. Being new to the Beam releasing process, my question > might be trivial to someone actually performing the release. > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 4:49 PM Lukasz Cwik

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

I left some comments. Being new to the Beam releasing process, my question might be trivial to someone actually performing the release. On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 4:49 PM Lukasz Cwik wrote: > Please vote based on the vendored dependencies release process as > discussed[1] and documented[2]. > >

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

+1 On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 2:07 AM Łukasz Gajowy wrote: > +1 > > Thanks for documenting the process clearly. > > Łukasz > > sob., 6 lip 2019 o 20:32 David Morávek > napisał(a): > >> +1 >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 6 Jul 2019, at 11:25, Lukasz Cwik wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> On Wed, Jul 3,

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

+1 Thanks for documenting the process clearly. Łukasz sob., 6 lip 2019 o 20:32 David Morávek napisał(a): > +1 > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 6 Jul 2019, at 11:25, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 10:24 AM Jens Nyman wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On 2019/07/02 23:49:10, Lukasz

Re: [VOTE] Vendored dependencies release process

+1 Sent from my iPhone > On 6 Jul 2019, at 11:25, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > > +1 > >> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 10:24 AM Jens Nyman wrote: >> +1 >> >> On 2019/07/02 23:49:10, Lukasz Cwik wrote: >> > Please vote based on the vendored dependencies release process as> >> > discussed[1] and

  1   2   >